Posts
Thoughts after reading Out There Somewhere by Simon Ortiz…
Ortiz is an Acoma Pueblo poet. We kind of like his stuff, though we don’t understand half of it. There is still a certain cadence and rhythm to his writing that is appealing. And he tells some good stories.
He is not an absurd man, though this does not prevent him from stumbling on absurdity now and then. All poets, it seems, take an oath to awareness of a kind… the shimmer of a lake, the veins in a leaf, the wrinkles in an old man’s face, the gleam in a new mother’s eyes… they notice all manner of things, even things of a seemingly trivial nature.
Nonetheless, reading Ortiz made us wonder. He is very much wrapped up in his Native American identity. He identifies very strongly with the culture of the Acoma Pueblo.
As we are Americans of European descent, we can only imagine what it must be like to grow up on an Indian reservation… what it must be like to be part of a people so trampled on in history. Ortiz has obviously endured many slights and insults. He has seen the darker side of life on the Res… the alcohol and the drugs, the poverty, the frustrations.
To some degree, then, we sympathize with Ortiz. He is not always bitter or angry. His message is more one of hope in a resistance, in a creative struggle, to maintain his people’s identity.
But we wonder if attaching oneself so powerfully to an identity also blinds one to the absurdity of it all. We think it must, whether we invest our sense of self into a political party or a religion or an ethnic group.
Can one be dethatched, or enjoy that sense of equanimity that the absurd man covets if one is so invested in these groups?
Neither of us – Rick or Inigo – cultivates particularly strong attachments in this way. We do not “live through our children” as so many parents do, stressing out over every little failure or celebrating every little triumph. We are not loyal to any political party, in fact we no longer vote. We do not visit church, or the temple or the synagogue.
I suppose it is possible one could be loyal to a group and yet remain an absurd man, knowing nothing matters. We had a friend who was a devout Catholic. He went to church every Sunday. He was otherwise so rational and scientific. Once we asked him how he squared his work in science with his faith. He replied “I just like the pageantry of religion.” That phrase has stuck with us. He just liked it for its own sake, but put no special meaning on it.
Perhaps, then, one can remain part of a group like this and yet remain aware of the greater absurdity of existence, its meaninglessness and ultimate end in death.
In any event, we wish Ortiz well on his journey. And we thank him for a couple of hours of pleasurable reading. But for us, we think it is unwise to lean so heavily on identification with a group (of any kind) to find peace and contentment. That peace and contentment is within each of us, as the old sages - and the absurd men - have long known.
For someone whose pride and life depends upon their identification with a particular ethincity or religious background, how do you introduce the absurd to them? Isn't the subject of this post essentially the cause of many wars and struggles throughout the history of civilization as well as the struggle with one-self?
ReplyDeleteI have sought to model my life after the absurd man, however, when one lives in a society whose essential function is to provide identity and attachment, it can be unbelievably difficult to live the absurd life.
Hi Krishna,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote:
"For someone whose pride and life depends upon their identification with a particular ethincity or religious background, how do you introduce the absurd to them?"
Good question. We don't know, but we tend to think that such allegiances blind one to the absurdities. We wonder if it's possible to introduce the absurd to such people.
You wrote:
"Isn't the subject of this post essentially the cause of many wars and struggles throughout the history of civilization as well as the struggle with one-self?"
We think so. That's another good point. These differences between people are artificial differences in the absurd mind. But they do seem to be at the root of the bloodiest conflicts of mankind.
You wrote:
"I have sought to model my life after the absurd man, however, when one lives in a society whose essential function is to provide identity and attachment, it can be unbelievably difficult to live the absurd life."
Wow. We are glad someone else thinks this too. We have been mulling turning this idea into a post for some time - "Living the absurd life in an anti-absurd society" or something like that.
We haven't figured it out all out yet, at least not in a way we'd present on the blog yet, but we agree: It can be incredibly difficult.
Inigo
Thank you so much for the quick response Inigo, I truly enjoy reading the blog on a daily basis. The questions and ideas that this blog brings forth are the very ideas that I tackle in my mind every day and struggle with, so thank you!
ReplyDeleteIt's very nice to see some fellow non-voters in the United States. Even on a political level, back before my realization of the absurdity of it all, I found it to be a meaningless action (do you want the puppet on the left, or the puppet on the right?). And it's very curious to me that so many people who do vote view not voting as the ultimate secular sin. Have you experienced similar results?
ReplyDeleteModern Man,
ReplyDeleteAgree... and yes, our non-voting is a very unpopular stance with nearly everyone we know. More than unpopular, it is vehemently denounced as if our refusal to participate were some kind of personal insult, or some kind of crime against humanity. Then there are those who proudly go around with little buttons saying "I voted!" Oy.
Inigo.
You say, "we think it is unwise to lean so heavily on identification with a group (of any kind)"
ReplyDeleteWhen labeling yourself as absurd,are you not assigning identity and identifying with it?
The web site promotes a group identity to anyone who follows it, people like me.
Anonmymous-
ReplyDeleteGood question. In fact, this is a common objection to the absurd - namely, that it is simply a belief system like any other, and thus essentially contradictory.
But to us this is to miss the point. To begin with, we do not view absurdity as some part of "who" we are - indeed, we view this as a meaningless statement. As we have discussed in the past, one of the reasons we use the editorial "we" in this blog is to reinforce the notion that we do not exist in any real sense; "Rick Bomstein" is no more tangible than a ripple in a pond.
Thus, we are not seeking to promote a "group identity"; indeed, just the opposite! We started this blog because we discovered a way of looking at the world that allows us to find peace and contentment in the very fact that fills most people with dread - that we are all ultimately inconsequential, impermanent, and alone. Our goal in sharing this is simply to aid others in coming to similar revelations.
The answer to your question, then, is an emphatic no - while we believe strongly in the absurd, we do not "identify" with it in the way others call themselves "Italian," or "Jewish," or even "wealthy." The absurd man accepts none of these qualifiers as valid - indeed, we would argue that one who "defines" himself as absurd unwittingly contradicts himself.
As Sheldon Solomon once put it, all humans (absurd or otherwise) are merely "corporeal creatures--sentient pieces of bleeding, defecating, urinating, vomiting, exfoliating, perspring, fornicating, menstruating, ejaculating, flatuence-producing, expectorating meat--that ultimately may be no more enduring than cockroaches or cucumbers."
Anonymous wrote:
ReplyDelete"When labeling yourself as absurd,are you not assigning identity and identifying with it?"
Well, perhaps we are. We think not, because the absurd is more of an attitude, not a religion or party or club. We hold no meetings, take no dues and have no parades. We nominate no candidates. We lobby no one. We ask no allegiance. People are free to come and go as they please.
There are lines of distinction here. One of us is left-handed. Does identifying one as left-handed mean that that person must lean heavily on that identification? We don't think so.
Same with the absurd. Ours is a gathering of free spirits. More like people coming together to enjoy a few drinks at the bar than a political rally or church gathering.
Inigo